ENERGY FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: This
session was facilitated by Vice-Chair Frances Lisson (Australia).
After offering general comments on the Chair’s text, countries proceeded
to make specific textual suggestions.

Noting
the diversity of views in the group, Egypt, for the G-77/CHINA, said
that the Chair’s text was not balanced as well as they would like.
Germany, for the EU, expressed some concern but also hope that
CSD-15 would deliver an
important outcome. The US expressed disappointment, and with CANADA,
NORWAY and SWITZERLAND noted that the document could be more concise.
Grenada, for AOSIS, stressed the need to include financing mechanisms
such as venture capital in the document. NORWAY suggested strengthening
the role of women and energy efficiency.

In the
chapter on energy for sustainable development, the Chair’s text contains
four introductory paragraphs, including a list of actions to be taken.
The chapter also contains two sections, each with subsections, on
“regional, sub-regional and international cooperation” and “means of
implementation.”

The
EU, supported by the G-77/CHINA, proposed text emphasizing the
importance of energy in achieving the MDGs. SAUDI ARABIA, with support
from AZERBAIJAN and the RUSSIAN FEDERATION, suggested language
strengthening the role of fossil fuels in the future; whereas, the EU,
supported by GRENADA but opposed by KUWAIT, urged text that said fossil
fuels “may” instead of “will” play an “important” instead of “dominant”
role in the future. AZERBAIJAN, supported by SAUDI ARABIA, proposed text
recommending the “increased development and use of advanced fossil fuel
technologies.”

ARGENTINA, with support from AUSTRALIA, AZERBAIJAN, CANADA and the
RUSSIAN FEDERATION, proposed replacing the term “advanced, cleaner
fossil fuel technologies” with “advanced energy technologies” throughout
the document, and SWITZERLAND, supported by the EU, suggested deleting
“hydrogen” from a list of recommended renewable energy sources.

On
targets, the EU proposed replacing text that suggested increased use of
policy tools to meet goals and targets, with language recommending
time-bound targets on energy efficiency and renewable energy. JAPAN
supported the original text. The G-77/CHINA preferred to defer
discussion on specific language on targets.

On
text relating to phasing out harmful subsidies, the G-77/CHINA sought
greater clarification.

Vice-Chair Lisson adjourned the session at 11:50am to enable G-77/China
consultations, and at 3:00pm she announced that the session would resume
on Friday morning.

WORKING GROUP 2

CLIMATE CHANGE: This session was facilitated
by Vice-Chair Luiz Alberto Figueiredo Machado (Brazil). After offering
general comments on the Chair’s text, countries proceeded to make
specific textual suggestions.

The US
expressed disappointment with the length and tenor of the Chair’s text,
which he said should reflect the magnitude of the challenge and the
progress made. Germany, for the EU, Kenya, for the G-77/CHINA, and Cape
Verde, for AOSIS, expressed general satisfaction. CANADA said the text
did not reflect the global nature of the problem and its solution. He
added that the text should indicate the role and added value of the
CSD, and the
“commonality” of the climate challenge.

In the
chapter on climate change, the Chair’s text contains two introductory
paragraphs, including a list of actions to be taken. The chapter also
contains two sections, each with subsections on “regional, sub-regional
and international cooperation” and “means of implementation.” In the
introductory paragraphs, the G-77/CHINA suggested reframing the language
to reflect the urgency, importance and reality of climate change and its
impacts, special threats posed to developing countries, adaptation and
mitigation, and historic responsibilities. He also said that the
reference to post-2012 action should not overshadow the discussions. The
EU suggested referring to the security implication of climate change
and, supported by SWITZERLAND, to the reality and urgency of climate
change and the latest findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change (IPCC). The EU, opposed by the US, stressed the importance of
sending a message to COP-13 and COP/MOP-3 on reaching a post-2012
agreement. The EU introduced language reflecting its concerns, including
on launching negotiations on a post-2012 agreement at COP-13 and
COP/MOP-3, and completing them by 2009. SWITZERLAND added language
noting that climate change is caused by human activities.

In the
paragraph on actions to be taken, the G-77/CHINA noted the need to
reflect countries’ common but differentiated responsibilities and to
mainstream gender. On reducing emissions in accordance with the UNFCCC,
the US and the EU suggested language streamlining the text. On linking
climate change policies with other policies and measures, the G-77/CHINA
cautioned against singling out specific sectors, and suggested a
reference to “sustainable development strategies.” SWITZERLAND suggested
linking climate change policies to “sustainable energy policies,” and
the US to “energy technologies.” TANZANIA suggested a new paragraph on
adaptation, and the EU on creating stable incentives to enhance the use
of market-based mechanisms. On carbon capture and storage, JAPAN
suggested text requiring consideration of environmental impacts. The EU
sought a reference to environmental safety, as well as the development
of such technology within the “necessary technical, economic and
regulatory framework.” On carbon sinks, MEXICO, opposed by BRAZIL,
sought a reference to “forest conservation and sustainable management.”
The EU proposed a reference to “sustainable afforestation,” NORWAY to
“preserving biodiversity,” and TANZANIA to “avoiding deforestation.” On
increasing community resilience to climate change-related disasters, the
EU suggested actions to tackle “water scarcity and droughts,” JAPAN to
“integrated water resource management,” and ZIMBABWE to “enhancing
indigenous coping strategies.” MEXICO suggested that ecosystems be
managed so as to “maintain their environmental services.”

In the
section on international cooperation, the G-77/CHINA suggested
strengthening support for mitigation and adaptation. On participation in
the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), the US proposed language limiting
the application of the paragraph to countries that are party to the
Kyoto Protocol. On funding mechanisms for adaptation, the EU proposed
strengthening “existing” funding mechanisms, TANZANIA added “for coping
with the impacts of climate change,” while AUSTRALIA, supported by
CANADA and JAPAN, proposed deleting the paragraph as it refers to items
included in UNFCCC negotiations. Calling for coordination between the
Kyoto and Montreal protocols, the EU proposed new language on ozone
depleting substances that are also greenhouse gases. She also suggested
a new paragraph on promoting awareness among consumers and producers on
their contributions to climate change. AOSIS proposed the establishment
of a renewable energy fund. On the development of insurance schemes by
industrialized countries to reduce the adverse impacts of climate change
on developing countries, especially SIDS, LDCs and Landlocked Developing
Countries (LLDCs), SWITZERLAND proposed, and AUSTRALIA, CANADA and the
US opposed, text referring to climate change impacts caused by
industrialized countries.

In the
chapter on industrial development, the Chair’s text contains two
introductory paragraphs, including a list of actions to be taken. The
chapter also contains two sections, each with subsections on ï¿½regional,
sub-regional and international cooperationï¿½ and ï¿½means of
implementation.ï¿½

In the introductory paragraphs SWITZERLAND proposed
text on ï¿½sustainableï¿½ economic growth and industrial development ï¿½within
the natural resource base.ï¿½ The G-77/CHINA noted the need to reflect the
importance of industrial development to poverty alleviation, and
suggested deleting the reference to the role of sustainable use of
natural resources in reducing costs, increasing competitiveness and
employment, and reducing environmental degradation. She suggested
replacing this language with text indicating that ï¿½managing the natural
resource base in a sustainable and integrated manner is essential for
sustainable development.ï¿½ On the right to decide their own industrial
development strategies, CANADA proposed that states should have ï¿½the
responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction and
control do not cause damage to the environment.ï¿½

In the
paragraph on actions to be taken on national policy frameworks, the EU
proposed adding the phrase ï¿½building on the principle of sustainability
and good governance.ï¿½ The G-77/CHINA questioned the existence of such a
principle. On education, SWITZERLAND, supported by CANADA and the EU,
suggested a reference to promoting ï¿½education and awareness-raising to
change consumer behavior toward more sustainable lifestyles.ï¿½ On
innovative management instruments, CANADA introduced the phrase
ï¿½voluntary agreements,ï¿½ and EU the term ï¿½green public procurement.ï¿½ On
corporate environmental and social responsibility, ISRAEL suggested
referring to ï¿½transparency,ï¿½ and NORWAY to the UN Principles for
Responsible Investment and the UN Global Compact. Regarding patterns of
production and consumption, the G-77/CHINA emphasized the special needs
of developing countries. On marine resources, PALAU suggested adding a
reference to ï¿½fisheries based on coral reefs.ï¿½ A number of delegates
questioned the inclusion of a paragraph on agriculture in the industrial
development section and resolved to review it later.

In the
section on regional, subregional and international cooperation, some
delegates noted the need for further consultation with capitals. On
north-south, south-south and triangular technology cooperation, the EU
and JAPAN suggested deleting a reference to ï¿½sharing of intellectual
property and know how,ï¿½ while BOTSWANA called for ï¿½equitable sharing.ï¿½

In the
section on means of implementation, the EU proposed numerous
modifications to the text, including: emphasizing education and skills
development ï¿½on a non-discriminatory basisï¿½; deleting a paragraph on
innovation and entrepreneurship; adding paragraphs on resource
efficiency and integrated product policies; and adding a paragraph on
investment and trade policies from the ï¿½inter-linkages and cross-cutting
issues, including means of implementationï¿½ section. MEXICO opposed the
deletion of the innovation and entrepreneurship paragraph, and the
G-77/CHINA asked the EU to clarify its additional paragraphs.

IN THE CORRIDORS

The
erratic start of negotiations on the energy section of the Chairï¿½s draft
has led to some grumbling from delegates. For most of the day the
G-77/China were engaged in continuous internal consultations, which led
to canceling the afternoon session of Working Group 1. Detailed
amendments are expected to be presented on Friday afternoon, aimed at
ï¿½balancing outï¿½ the Chairï¿½s text.

The
controversy over the introductory language of the energy section,
according to some participants, is a sign of the fissure between the EU
and major oil and gas producers. A delegate was heard commenting on EU
amendments, which ï¿½unrealistically downgraded the clear dominance of
fossil fuels in the foreseeable future.ï¿½

Meanwhile, the first
reading of the climate section proceeded in a surprisingly speedy
manner, leading some to speculate that a more robust negotiation is on
the way. A second reading of the climate text planned for Thursday
afternoon had to be moved to Friday as the G-77/China had yet to
formulate its specific textual proposals. But as one delegate observed,
climate change discussions, like the weather, are always tricky to
predict: ï¿½most begin in the fog, get worse before they get better, and
offer the possibility of a fine closing.ï¿½

This issue of the Earth
Negotiations Bulletin ï¿½ <enb@iisd.org>
is written and edited by
Twig Johnson, Ph.D., Harry
Jonas, Lavanya Rajamani,
D.Phil., James Van Alstine
and Andrey Vavilov, Ph.D.
The Digital Editor is
ï¿½ngeles Estrada. The Editor
is Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. <pam@iisd.org>
and the Director of IISD
Reporting Services is
Langston James ï¿½Kimoï¿½ Goree
VI <kimo@iisd.org>.
The Sustaining Donors of the
Bulletin are the United
Kingdom (through the
Department for International
Development ï¿½ DFID), the
Government of the United
States of America (through
the Department of State
Bureau of Oceans and
International Environmental
and Scientific Affairs), the
Government of Canada
(through CIDA), the Danish
Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
the Government of Germany
(through the German Federal
Ministry of Environment -
BMU, and the German Federal
Ministry of Development
Cooperation - BMZ), the
Netherlands Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, the
European Commission (DG-ENV)
and the Italian Ministry for
the Environment and
Territory General
Directorate for Nature
Protection. General Support
for the Bulletin during 2007
is provided by the Swiss
Federal Office for the
Environment (FOEN), the
Norwegian Ministry of
Foreign Affairs and the
Ministry of Environment, the
Government of Australia, the
Austrian Federal Ministry
for the Environment, the
Ministry of Environment of
Sweden, the New Zealand
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
and Trade, SWAN
International, the Japanese
Ministry of Environment
(through the Institute for
Global Environmental
Strategies - IGES) and the
Japanese Ministry of
Economy, Trade and Industry
(through the Global
Industrial and Social
Progress Research Institute
- GISPRI). Funding for
translation of the Earth
Negotiations Bulletin into
French has been provided by
the International
Organization of the Francophonie (IOF) and the
French Ministry of Foreign
Affairs. Funding for the
translation of the Earth
Negotiations Bulletin into
Spanish has been provided by
the Ministry of Environment
of Spain. The opinions
expressed in the Earth
Negotiations Bulletin are
those of the authors and do
not necessarily reflect the
views of IISD or other
donors. Excerpts from the
Earth Negotiations Bulletin
may be used in
non-commercial publications
with appropriate academic
citation. For information on
the Bulletin, including
requests to provide
reporting services, contact
the Director of IISD
Reporting Services at <kimo@iisd.org>,
+1-646-536-7556 or 212 East
47th St. #21F, New York, NY
10017, USA. The ENB Team at
the
CSD-15 can be contacted
by e-mail at <lavanya@iisd.org>.